Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

Doesn't that mean they transformed an animal's organ into a living being? That's pretty awesome.

We are filled with living beings called cells, which are in turn filled by living beings calles mitochindria. So next time you suck your thumb, remember, you are killing living beings.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Doesn't that mean they transformed an animal's organ into a living being? That's pretty awesome.

It is still just a piece of pulsing rat heart that is modified to move around as a jellyfish. It has no means to feed itself, no reason to move around nor means of reproduction. It's living tissue but it wont qualify as an individual organism.

"What is mentioned is Kaspersky’s vision for the future of Internet security—which
by Western standards can seem extreme. It includes requiring strictly monitored
digital passports for some online activities and enabling government regulation of
social networks to thwart protest movements. “It’s too much freedom there,”
Kaspersky says, referring to sites like Facebook. “Freedom is good. But the bad
guys—they can abuse this freedom to manipulate public opinion.”

These are not exactly comforting words from a man who is responsible for the
security of so many of our PCs, tablets, and smartphones. But that is the paradox
of Eugene Kaspersky: a close associate of the autocratic Putin regime who is
charged with safeguarding the data of millions of Americans; a supposedly-retired
intelligence officer who is busy today revealing the covert activities of other
nations; a vital presence in the open and free Internet who doesn’t want us to be
too free. It’s an enigmatic profile that’s on the rise as Kaspersky’s influence
grows."

"In one hotel ballroom after another, Kaspersky insists that malware like Stuxnet
and Flame should be banned by international treaty, like sarin gas or weaponized
anthrax. He argues that the Internet should be partitioned and certain regions of
it made accessible only to users who present an “Internet passport.” That way,
anonymous hackers wouldn’t be able to get at sensitive sites—like, say, nuclear
plants. Sure, it might seem like we’d be sacrificing some privacy online. But with all
the advertisers, search engines, and governments tracking us today, Kaspersky
argues, we don’t really have any privacy left anyway. "

Or prehaps the more logical approach would be to isolate the sensitive systems from the majority of the Internet, rather than partition the whole of the Internet. (The government structures could probably use a seperate Internet structure that does not tie into the civilian net at all.)

Or perhaps that is what he is saying, but it doesn't come out that way.

"In one hotel ballroom after another, Kaspersky insists that malware like Stuxnet
and Flame should be banned by international treaty, like sarin gas or weaponized
anthrax. He argues that the Internet should be partitioned and certain regions of
it made accessible only to users who present an “Internet passport.” That way,
anonymous hackers wouldn’t be able to get at sensitive sites—like, say, nuclear
plants.

So this is that Kaspersky guy who's supposed to know what he's talking about?
Is this just a bad translation/summary, or is he actually such an idiot?

This thing already exists. You can make up your own networks other than the internet. You can connect them over VPNs, or by pulling very long cables if you like. You can only let people in that have a 'passport'.
Unless they are 'anonymous hackers' in which case they will try to hack in without the passport, which is the whole point of being an anonymous hacker. If they had regular access, they wouldn't need to hack anything.

This is not extrem either. Almost everyone has a small version of these 'not internet'-internets at home. And if you pull the uplink plug, you are super safe from hackers!

What is the new thing here that Mr. Kaspersky is thinking off?
Let me guess: What he really wants, is to force an ID linked to our personal data into every one of our IP-packets. Genius. Everyone will be traceable. Except for hackers of course.

"It's now possible to print functional weapons at home. This is going to progress
rapidly now.

Think: global file sharing of designs for servicable weapons, from pistols on up
to ?, that can be printed at home. What you can print -- from the materials to the
size/quality of the object to the completeness (snap together construction) -- is
already moving forward quickly. The weapons effort will just be along for the
ride."

I have a question and I think someone here would know it. I once heard something along the lines of this: "If the big bang had happened to a millionth of a degree off from what it did, the universe would have been much different and life on Earth wouldn't be here". Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I'm guessing by a millionth of a degree off, it just means how things initially expanded at the very beginning. Is this true? Is millionth the right number? Or was it billionth?

I have a question and I think someone here would know it. I once heard something along the lines of this: "If the big bang had happened to a millionth of a degree off from what it did, the universe would have been much different and life on Earth wouldn't be here". Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I'm guessing by a millionth of a degree off, it just means how things initially expanded at the very beginning. Is this true? Is millionth the right number? Or was it billionth?

degree isn't really the right term here... but that can be about either the ratio of matter / anti-matter, or more commonly the distribution pattern of matters that eventually allowed galaxies to form.

3D printing is really spreading rapidly, its no longer just industrial or academic, you can buy really good 3D printers under 2000 USD and print just about anything that can be constructed digitally in your own home.

You can print everything from practical utensils, toys, furniture, machines and like the article is about, weapons.

And all you need is to supply your machine with the print powder.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

I have a question and I think someone here would know it. I once heard something along the lines of this: "If the big bang had happened to a millionth of a degree off from what it did, the universe would have been much different and life on Earth wouldn't be here". Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I'm guessing by a millionth of a degree off, it just means how things initially expanded at the very beginning. Is this true? Is millionth the right number? Or was it billionth?

If the universe started out with different physics, then it definitely would have progressed differently.

But even if there isn't going to be life on Earth, its going to develop somewhere else anyway.

And all you need is to supply your machine with the print powder.If the universe started out with different physics, then it definitely would have progressed differently.

But even if there isn't going to be life on Earth, its going to develop somewhere else anyway.

I think what I heard is that this tiny, tiny difference would have meant a very different universe, and I think something about no galaxies or stars. I can't recall, just that it would have made things very different from an incredibly small difference at the big bang.

I think what I heard is that this tiny, tiny difference would have meant a very different universe, and I think something about no galaxies or stars. I can't recall, just that it would have made things very different from an incredibly small difference at the big bang.

What you're thinking about is the distribution of matters throughout the universe after the big bang. If it was too homogenous, there would not have been enough gravitational pull between matters for them to gather together to form stars and galaxies.

I think what I heard is that this tiny, tiny difference would have meant a very different universe, and I think something about no galaxies or stars. I can't recall, just that it would have made things very different from an incredibly small difference at the big bang.

You probably heard it from Carl Sagan, Michio Kaku and other scientists on Discovery Channel.

It is true that if there's a difference in how the universe started, everything would be different. But it is also very simple logic.

Imagine if the electron wasn't created during the big bang, then there would be no chemical bonds and reactions, no atoms, meaning no hydrogen, no stars and planets.

Now while I do loathe most anything involved with L. Ron Hubbard (he founded Scientology afterall), I do like the idea of this. Basically, in 1987 they had several well-known sci-fi writers make predictions on what they think 2012 will be like, and then unearth the predictions 25 years later. See for yourself who got close, and who got so far off the mark.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnimeFan188

Printing Weapons at Home for Fun and Mayhem:

"It's now possible to print functional weapons at home. This is going to progress
rapidly now.

Think: global file sharing of designs for servicable weapons, from pistols on up
to ?, that can be printed at home. What you can print -- from the materials to the
size/quality of the object to the completeness (snap together construction) -- is
already moving forward quickly. The weapons effort will just be along for the
ride."